Gooden v. Suntrust Mortgage, Inc., et al.,
Filing
10
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/18/11 ORDERING that Defendants have up to and including December 19, 2011 to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint. (Becknal, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
NIALL P. MCCARTHY (State Bar No. 160175)
nmccarthy@cpmlegal.com
JUSTIN T. BERGER (State Bar No. 250346)
jberger@cpmlegal.com
ERIC J. BUESCHER (State Bar No. 271323)
ebuescher@cpmlegal.com
COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP
840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200
Burlingame, CA 94010
Telephone:
(650) 697-6000
Facsimile:
(650) 692-3606
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SHEILA GOODEN
8
9
10
11
12
13
MICHAEL J. STEINER (State Bar No. 112079)
mjs@severson.com
PHILIP BARILOVITS (State Bar No. 199944)
pb@severson.com
SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
(415) 398-3344
Facsimile:
(415) 956-0439
14
15
16
Attorneys for Defendants,
SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC.
SUNTRUST BANKS, INC.
17
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
18
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
19 SHEILA GOODEN, an individual,
Case No.: 2-11-CV-02595-JAM-DAD
20
FURTHER STIPULATION AND ORDER
REGARDING TIME FOR SUNTRUST
MORTGAGE, INC. AND SUNTRUST
BANKS, INC. TO RESPOND TO
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff,
21
22
vs.
23
24 SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC. a Virginia
corporation, SUNTRUST BANKS, INC., a
25 Georgia corporation,
26
Defendants.
27
28
11950/0104/983690.1
FURTHER STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE TIME
TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
Case No. 2-11-CV-02595-JAM-DAD
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com
1
WHEREAS, Sheila Gooden (“Plaintiff”) filed a Class Action Complaint (“Complaint”) in the
2
above-entitled case against defendants SunTrust Mortgage, Inc. and SunTrust Banks, Inc. (together,
3
the “Defendants”);
4
WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants stipulated, pursuant to E.D. Cal. Local Rule 144, that
5
Defendants had up to and including November 23, 2011 to answer or otherwise respond to the
6
Complaint;
7
WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants are in still in discussions regarding a possible
8
amendment of the Complaint and/or resolution of the case and Plaintiff and Defendants have
9
stipulated that Defendants may have up to and including December 19, 2011 to answer or otherwise
10
respond to the complaint
11
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, SUBJECT TO COURT ORDER, THAT:
12
Defendants have up to and including December 19, 2011 to answer or otherwise respond to
13
14
15
the Complaint.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: November 18, 2011
COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP
16
17
By:
18
/s/ Justin T. Berger
JUSTIN T. BERGER
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SHEILA GOODEN
19
20
DATED: November 18, 2011
SEVERSON & WERSON
21
22
By:
23
/s/ Philip Barilovits
PHILIP BARILOVITS
Attorneys for Defendants
SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC.
SUNTRUST BANKS, INC.
24
25
26
27
11950/0104/983690.1
28
-1 FURTHER STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE TIME
TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
Case No. 2-11-CV-02595-JAM-DAD
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com
ORDER
1
2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
4
DATED: 11/18/2011
/s/ John A. Mendez_______________
HON. JOHN A. MENDEZ
U. S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
11950/0104/983690.1
28
-1 FURTHER STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE TIME
TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
Case No. 2-11-CV-02595-JAM-DAD
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?